{ "vercy": "1.0-draft", "publication": { "status": "research-draft", "adjudicationStatus": "unreviewed", "publishableCanonical": false, "generatedAt": "2026-09-12T09:02:10Z", "providers": [ "Codex" ], "breadth": "recalled by Codex without web access - no source was read", "missingProviders": [], "pass": 2, "cost": { "grok": { "seconds": 19.6, "error": "Reading additional input from stdin...\nOpenAI Codex v0.153.4\n--------\nworkdir: R:\\02_PROJECTS\\02_Meta_Models_Platforms\\Ver.cy\\current\\thing-registry-backlog\nmodel: gpt-6-astra\nprovider: openai\napproval: never\nsandbox: read-only\nreasoning effort: none\nreasoning summaries: none\nsession id: 01a094d9-3cda-7691-9b51-0fcb9ae7ac4b\n--------\nuser\nDescribe what is already known about one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: decoy\nSense to describe: (none recorded)\nDomain code: XCT.QLT\nAlso known as: (none)\n\n\nContext for this batch of 1001 things:\n# Batch 043: 1001 registere", "usd": 0.0, "recall": true }, "codex": { "seconds": 70.8, "error": "Reading additional input from stdin...\nOpenAI Codex v0.153.4\n--------\nworkdir: R:\\02_PROJECTS\\02_Meta_Models_Platforms\\Ver.cy\\current\\thing-registry-backlog\nmodel: gpt-6-astra\nprovider: openai\napproval: never\nsandbox: read-only\nreasoning effort: none\nreasoning summaries: none\nsession id: 01a094d9-3ceb-71d2-b192-9a626a107f16\n--------\nuser\nYou are drafting a Vercy meta-model for one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: decoy\nRegistry id: vr.tr.decoy-q441721\nPlane / domain: XCT / XCT.QLT\nRegistry definition: (none recorded)\nNames folded into this entry: (none)\n\n\nCont" } }, "enrichment": { "pass": 3, "engine": "claude", "producedAt": "2026-10-06T12:00:00Z", "ingestedAt": "2026-10-06T08:42:05+00:00", "fields": [ "agent_conduct", "ethics", "failure_modes_and_hazards", "owners", "visual_identification" ] }, "revisions": [ { "at": "2026-10-07T11:33:11+00:00", "engine": "codex", "fields": [ "agent_conduct", "definition", "distinguishing_features", "ethics", "failure_modes_and_hazards", "in_scope", "out_of_scope", "owners", "purpose", "scope_statement", "visual_identification" ], "answering_review": "774f5addc82b3e7251b946a34c4e614095ddae06327c56543f167c5a0b3f7b14" } ], "gate": { "passed": true, "version": "1.0", "at": "2026-10-07T12:16:33+00:00", "evidence": [ "completeness 1.00", "sense: Wikidata description", "2 live sources", "review by codex: pass" ] } }, "metaModel": { "id": "THING-Q441721", "registryId": "vr.tr.decoy-q441721", "name": "decoy", "version": "0.1.0-research.1", "entryKind": "thing", "family": "Thing Registry", "domain": [ "XCT.QLT" ], "status": "research-draft" }, "canonicalUrl": "https://ver.cy/models/thing/q441721/", "model": { "registry_id": "vr.tr.decoy-q441721", "name": "decoy", "purpose": "Enable an agent to recognise a chess decoy, explain the significance of the destination square and assess whether the tactic achieves its intended advantage.", "definition": "A decoy is a chess tactic that draws an opposing piece onto a disadvantageous square, often through a sacrifice, so that its placement enables a tactical advantage.", "scope_statement": "This model covers the chess tactic of drawing an opposing piece onto a disadvantageous square, including the inducement, the destination and the resulting tactical opportunity.", "in_scope": [ "The opposing piece targeted by the tactic and the square onto which it is drawn are in scope.", "The move or sacrifice that induces the opposing piece to occupy the destination square is in scope.", "The tactical disadvantage created by the piece's destination is in scope.", "The opponent's available responses and their effect on the tactic's validity are in scope.", "Relationships with other chess tactics are in scope where they explain the decoy." ], "out_of_scope": [ "Physical decoy devices and deceptive signals outside chess are out of scope.", "Hunting, military and security uses of decoys are out of scope.", "General chess strategy without a decoy tactic is out of scope.", "Distraction or deception of a player outside the legal moves of the game is out of scope.", "Tournament administration and player profiles are out of scope." ], "distinguishing_features": [ "A decoy draws an opposing piece onto a square where its placement creates a tactical disadvantage.", "A sacrifice can induce the response, but a sacrifice alone does not establish a decoy.", "The destination square is central to a decoy, whereas deflection centres on drawing a piece away from a defensive duty.", "A single combination can involve both decoy and deflection.", "A proposed decoy must be assessed against the opponent's legal alternatives." ], "characteristics": [ { "name": "Decoy bearer", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "physical object | organism | person in a role | emitted signal | digital representation | choice option | other | unresolved", "why_it_matters": "Separates what bears the role from the role itself and identifies relevant neighbouring models." }, { "name": "Intended responder", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Identified person, animal, group or detection system, with relevant perceptual or decision capabilities", "why_it_matters": "A presentation can function as a decoy for one responder while being transparent or irrelevant to another." }, { "name": "Diversion relationship", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Decoy, intended response, displaced alternative and deployment objective", "why_it_matters": "Makes the claimed redirection explicit and exposes cases where the word decoy is being used differently." }, { "name": "Presented identity or attraction", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Claimed identity, apparent function, salient reward, apparent threat or other responder-relevant interpretation", "why_it_matters": "Identifies what the responder must perceive for the proposed mechanism to operate." }, { "name": "Cue channels", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "visual | acoustic | chemical | thermal | electromagnetic | behavioural | semantic | multiple", "why_it_matters": "Determines which observations can support or defeat the intended interpretation." }, { "name": "Presentation state", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "planned | prepared | presented | withdrawn | retired; responder recognition recorded separately", "why_it_matters": "Distinguishes operational availability from whether a responder has recognised the deception." }, { "name": "Engagement rate", "kind": "measurement", "unit_or_values": "Proportion of eligible exposures producing a specified response, with denominator and observation window", "why_it_matters": "Measures response to the decoy without assuming that engagement proves successful diversion." }, { "name": "Diversion effect", "kind": "measurement", "unit_or_values": "Change in a specified response to the intended alternative relative to a stated comparison, with uncertainty", "why_it_matters": "Tests whether the decoy changes the outcome it was introduced to influence." }, { "name": "Responder recognition", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "unknown | no observed recognition | suspected recognition | observed recognition", "why_it_matters": "Recognition can alter subsequent behaviour and should not be inferred solely from engagement or non-engagement." } ], "affordances": [ "Identify the bearer, intended responder and diversion relationship that justify a decoy classification.", "Compare presented cues with the responder's likely observations and record detectable inconsistencies.", "Specify a bounded evaluation separating exposure, engagement and actual diversion.", "Monitor recognition, repeated-exposure effects and unintended responders.", "Recommend presentation changes or withdrawal against explicit objectives and constraints." ], "agent_conduct": { "may": [ "Explain and assess decoy tactics in chess positions.", "Identify the targeted piece, destination square and intended tactical advantage.", "Discuss alternative responses when evaluating a proposed decoy." ], "must_not": [ "Present an unverified decoy as a forced winning tactic.", "Provide outside assistance during play when the applicable rules prohibit it.", "Treat deception outside legal chess play as part of the tactic." ], "requires_human": [ "Disputes about whether assistance complies with competition rules require a human arbiter." ] }, "ethics": { "considerations": [ "Tactical inducement through legal chess moves is an accepted part of play.", "Analysis assistance must respect the rules governing fair competition." ], "affected_parties": [ "Chess players are affected by the accuracy and permitted use of tactical advice.", "Learners and instructors rely on clear explanations of chess tactics.", "Tournament participants and arbiters have an interest in fair play." ] }, "owners": { "steward": "Nobody owns the tactic; chess players, instructors and analysts document its use.", "master_systems": [] }, "visual_identification": [ "A board position or annotated game can show an opposing piece being drawn onto a tactically disadvantageous square.", "The relationship between the destination square and the resulting threat identifies the tactic more reliably than the appearance of a sacrifice." ], "failure_modes_and_hazards": [ "An opponent may decline the inducement and invalidate the expected continuation.", "An unsound sacrifice can lose material without producing sufficient compensation.", "Confusing decoy with general deception can obscure the tactic's chess-specific meaning." ], "what_it_is_for": [ "In chess, a decoy tactic attracts an opposing piece or king to a square where its placement enables a tactical gain.", "Players encounter the idea in game analysis, tactical exercises and combinations that may involve a sacrifice.", "The defining feature is attraction to a particular square, although a combination can also remove a defender from another duty." ], "standards_and_regulation": [ "The Laws of Chess, issued by the International Chess Federation, govern the legal moves and game outcomes within which a decoy tactic operates." ] }, "sources": [ { "id": "wikidata", "title": "Wikidata item Q441721: decoy", "url": "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q441721", "url_status": "live", "what_it_supports": "identity and sense of the item", "checked_by": "wikidata-api" }, { "id": "wikipedia-en", "title": "Wikipedia: Decoy (chess)", "url": "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decoy_%28chess%29", "url_status": "live", "what_it_supports": "general description of the item", "checked_by": "wikidata-api sitelink" } ], "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "decoy-role-and-boundaries", "name": "Decoy role and boundaries", "description": "Establishes what is acting as a decoy and which meaning of decoy applies.", "rationale": "The label describes a contextual role and can otherwise collapse replicas, lures, distractions and specialised technical usages into one category.", "layers": [ { "id": "role-assignment", "name": "Role assignment", "description": "Connects the decoy bearer to deliberate presentation and intended diversion.", "findings": [ { "id": "intended-diversion", "name": "Intended diversion", "description": "Record who designates the decoy, the response sought and the alternative that should receive less attention or action.", "questions": [ { "text": "What entity is deliberately presented as the decoy, and what evidence establishes that intention?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "intended-diversion-q01" }, { "text": "Whose response should move toward the decoy, and away from what alternative?", "kind": "definition", "id": "intended-diversion-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "neighbouring-concepts", "name": "Neighbouring concepts", "description": "Tests whether this usage requires diversion, imitation, attraction or a different domain-specific relationship.", "findings": [ { "id": "classification-boundary", "name": "Classification boundary", "description": "Explain why the instance is called a decoy rather than merely a replica, lure, bait, distraction or concealed object.", "questions": [ { "text": "What intended redirection distinguishes this instance from an ordinary replica, lure or distraction?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "classification-boundary-q01" }, { "text": "Does the relevant field use decoy for something other than a competing target of response, and what definition supports that usage?", "kind": "definition", "id": "classification-boundary-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "presentation-and-interpretation", "name": "Presentation and interpretation", "description": "Describes the cues the decoy presents and the interpretation those cues are intended to induce.", "rationale": "A decoy depends on responder-relevant perception rather than resemblance judged without context.", "layers": [ { "id": "perceptible-cues", "name": "Perceptible cues", "description": "Records how the decoy becomes detectable and apparently relevant.", "findings": [ { "id": "cue-profile", "name": "Cue profile", "description": "Identify the sensory or informational channels carrying the presentation and the conditions under which they can be detected.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which visual, acoustic, chemical, thermal, electromagnetic, behavioural or semantic cues make this decoy noticeable?", "kind": "definition", "id": "cue-profile-q01" }, { "text": "Under what distances, access conditions or environmental conditions can the intended responder detect those cues?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "cue-profile-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "apparent-significance", "name": "Apparent significance", "description": "Connects observable cues to the identity, opportunity or threat attributed to the decoy.", "findings": [ { "id": "interpretation-and-inconsistency", "name": "Interpretation and inconsistency", "description": "Record the intended interpretation and the observations that could undermine it.", "questions": [ { "text": "What must the responder believe or treat as relevant for the decoy to prompt the desired response?", "kind": "definition", "id": "interpretation-and-inconsistency-q01" }, { "text": "Which absent, conflicting or implausible cues could reveal the decoy under the responder's actual inspection conditions?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "interpretation-and-inconsistency-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "response-and-diversion", "name": "Response and diversion", "description": "Separates encountering the decoy, responding to it and changing behaviour toward the intended alternative.", "rationale": "A noticed or engaged decoy may fail to achieve its deployment objective.", "layers": [ { "id": "response-sequence", "name": "Response sequence", "description": "Defines observable stages between presentation and engagement.", "findings": [ { "id": "exposure-to-engagement", "name": "Exposure to engagement", "description": "Use explicit observations to distinguish opportunity for exposure, detection and the response sought.", "questions": [ { "text": "What observable event counts as exposure, detection and engagement for this responder?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "exposure-to-engagement-q01" }, { "text": "How will engagement caused by attraction or mistaken identification be distinguished from inspection by a responder that already recognises the decoy?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "exposure-to-engagement-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "objective-effect", "name": "Objective effect", "description": "Evaluates whether engagement produces the intended displacement of response.", "findings": [ { "id": "diversion-evidence", "name": "Diversion evidence", "description": "Assess changes to the intended alternative using a stated comparison and account for competing explanations.", "questions": [ { "text": "What change in attention, choice, resource use or action toward the intended alternative would count as successful diversion?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "diversion-evidence-q01" }, { "text": "What comparison supports attributing that change to the decoy rather than to concealment, environmental change or another intervention?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "diversion-evidence-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "recognition-and-persistence", "name": "Recognition and persistence", "description": "Tracks whether the decoy remains effective as responders inspect it or encounter it repeatedly.", "rationale": "Decoy performance can depend on an initial interpretation that does not survive inspection, learning or changed conditions.", "layers": [ { "id": "recognition-evidence", "name": "Recognition evidence", "description": "Distinguishes observed recognition from assumptions based on response alone.", "findings": [ { "id": "recognition-status", "name": "Recognition status", "description": "Record evidence that a responder has identified the presentation as a decoy and the behaviour that follows.", "questions": [ { "text": "What evidence indicates that the responder has recognised the decoy rather than merely ignored or failed to detect it?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "recognition-status-q01" }, { "text": "If the decoy is recognised, does it still redirect attention or action in a way relevant to the objective?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "recognition-status-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "repeated-exposure", "name": "Repeated exposure", "description": "Examines how prior encounters and changing presentation conditions affect the diversion mechanism.", "findings": [ { "id": "effect-persistence", "name": "Effect persistence", "description": "Assess whether changes in response reflect learning, habituation, cue degradation or differences between responders.", "questions": [ { "text": "How does the specified response change across repeated encounters, and can the same responders be distinguished from new ones?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "effect-persistence-q01" }, { "text": "What evidence would justify refreshing, repositioning or retiring the presentation?", "kind": "action", "id": "effect-persistence-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "deployment-and-withdrawal", "name": "Deployment and withdrawal", "description": "Connects decoy use to its operational boundaries, unintended effects and termination conditions.", "rationale": "A decoy can attract unintended responses or continue misleading after its intended purpose ends.", "layers": [ { "id": "bounded-presentation", "name": "Bounded presentation", "description": "Defines who may encounter the decoy and what constrains its presentation.", "findings": [ { "id": "permitted-and-unintended-responses", "name": "Permitted and unintended responses", "description": "Record deployment authority, responder boundaries and foreseeable consequences of mistaken engagement.", "questions": [ { "text": "What authorisation and context-specific restrictions govern presenting this decoy to the intended responder?", "kind": "action", "id": "permitted-and-unintended-responses-q01" }, { "text": "Which unintended people, animals or systems could engage with it, and what consequences would make that unacceptable?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "permitted-and-unintended-responses-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "termination-and-residual-cues", "name": "Termination and residual cues", "description": "Defines when the decoy should stop operating and how remaining misleading cues are handled.", "findings": [ { "id": "withdrawal-criteria", "name": "Withdrawal criteria", "description": "Specify stopping conditions and verify that removal or deactivation ends the relevant presentation.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which success, failure, recognition or unintended-engagement conditions require withdrawal?", "kind": "action", "id": "withdrawal-criteria-q01" }, { "text": "After withdrawal, what physical traces, signals or copied representations could continue functioning as decoys, and how will their status be checked?", "kind": "action", "id": "withdrawal-criteria-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "evidence-and-external-alignment", "name": "Evidence and external alignment", "description": "What the world already says about this thing, gathered so the model can be checked against it.", "rationale": "A model that cannot be lined up against existing standards, identifiers and practice cannot be adopted by anyone who already uses them.", "layers": [ { "id": "reported-evidence", "name": "Reported evidence", "description": "Findings from the breadth pass, kept separate from the structural claims.", "findings": [ { "id": "evidence-confidence-notes", "name": "Check these first", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "No sense is recorded; this entry treats decoy as a functional role spanning several domains rather than as one physical device.", "In choice research, a decoy option changes the relative attractiveness of other options and need not itself attract selection; this specialized usage requires separate treatment.", "These are recalled distinctions, not researched findings; domain-specific identifiers, regulations, and performance ranges remain unverified." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-confidence-notes-q01", "text": "Which of these check these first hold for the sense of decoy this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-kinds", "name": "Kinds and varieties", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "Hunting decoys that imitate animals", "Military dummy targets", "Electronic or acoustic countermeasure decoys", "Human decoys", "Cybersecurity decoys, including honeypots", "Decoy options in choice experiments" ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-kinds-q01", "text": "Which of these kinds and varieties hold for the sense of decoy this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-real-world-use", "name": "Real-world use", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "Attracting game animals within observation or hunting range.", "Diverting surveillance or attacks toward false military targets.", "Drawing a weapon's tracking system toward a substitute signal.", "Attracting unauthorized computer activity into an instrumented environment for detection and analysis.", "Studying how an added choice option changes preferences between existing alternatives." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-real-world-use-q01", "text": "Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of decoy this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-measurements", "name": "Typical measurements", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ { "quantity": "Probability that a target responds to the decoy", "typical_range": "0-1; performance depends on the target, environment, and response definition", "unit": "dimensionless" }, { "quantity": "Time for which the target remains engaged with the decoy", "typical_range": "Application-dependent; no general typical range", "unit": "seconds" } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-measurements-q01", "text": "Which of these typical measurements hold for the sense of decoy this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-failure-modes-and-hazards", "name": "Failure modes and hazards", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "The target distinguishes the decoy from the intended referent and ignores it.", "Repeated exposure enables learning or adaptation that reduces effectiveness.", "Deployment reveals the location or intentions of the party using the decoy.", "The decoy attracts unintended animals, people, or attacks.", "A poorly isolated cybersecurity decoy becomes a foothold for further intrusion." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-failure-modes-and-hazards-q01", "text": "Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of decoy this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-neighbours", "name": "Neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ { "name": "bait", "difference": "Bait offers an attraction or reward; a decoy typically serves as a substitute target or misleading representation, although one device can perform both roles." }, { "name": "camouflage", "difference": "Camouflage reduces detection or recognition of the protected subject; a decoy directs attention or action toward an alternative." }, { "name": "dummy", "difference": "A dummy is a substitute or imitation; it becomes a decoy when used to attract or misdirect a target." }, { "name": "distraction", "difference": "A distraction diverts attention but need not provide a substitute target or involve deception." }, { "name": "honeypot", "difference": "A cybersecurity honeypot is a particular kind of monitored decoy resource intended to attract unauthorized interaction." } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-neighbours-q01", "text": "Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of decoy this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] } ] } ] } ] }, "openQuestions": [ "Does registry id vr.tr.decoy-q441721 denote the general decoy role, a physical decoy class or a narrower established usage?", "Which authoritative domain definitions require imitation or mistaken identification, and which accept attraction or diversion without either?", "Should choice-set decoys, whose intended effect may be selection of another option, belong within this entry or a neighbouring concept model?", "How should biological entities called decoys be represented when the term describes an evolved or biochemical function rather than deliberate presentation?", "What evidence standards can distinguish genuine diversion from mere engagement across the domains ultimately included in this entry?" ], "statistics": { "bundles": 6, "layers": 11, "findings": 16, "questions": 26 } }